 | | | |
| ||||
|
Alexander Romanovich: NATO’s European old-timers are not at all inclined to respond to the anti-Russian military calls 15 ìàÿ 2015 Alexander Romanovich, Secretary of the Presidium of the Central Council on Foreign Affairs of Party A JUST Russia, a deputy of the JR State Duma faction commented on the meeting of the NATO countries’ ministers of foreign affairs held in Antalya (Turkey) on 13-14 May this year: Hand in hand, the NATO countries’ foreign ministers, who must have been heated by the resort sun of Turkey and the final banquet, sang in chorus Michael Jackson’s song "We are the world". Being translated, this famous musical composition means as much as "we are the whole world", and in the above-mentioned context it sounded like NATO’s pretence to being powerful and united. However, in reality, a two-day session of the NATO Council at the level of the MFA heads of 28 alliance member-countries showed that at present NATO has transformed into a rather worrying enterprise (especially for its old-timers) full of contradictions. The problem is that NATO expansion to the East and joining the alliance by Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania (its new members) put NATO in a number of long-term uncomfortable situations. The main among them is a steady growth of Russia’s natural discontent with NATO’s approaching the Russian borders and a simultaneous pressure made by the USA on its European NATO partners to do Moscow as much harm as possible. What is more, it is the former soviet Baltic republics that are the most active assistants of Washington. Instead of ‘keeping down’ and being content with the Baltic community’s support allowing them to live off and use the NATO programs benefits that fell to their lot, all the three of them are constantly inviting trouble and pestering the NATO leadership with their excessive Russophobia. This time in Antalya, Lithuanian foreign minister Linas Linkevicius once again stubbornly declared that " Russia by its actions is testing the alliance for alertness and solidarity" and "with regard to this, NATO should provide its permanent presence in the Baltic countries". Moreover, the head of the Lithuanian diplomacy called the alliance for the continuation of its "open door" policy, especially regarding the Eastern European states. Linkevicius especially called for paying attention to a NATO candidate from the Caucasus, which is just virtual, to be true. "It is necessary to pay more attention and provide a stronger support to Georgia that is implementing important reforms in the spheres of security and defense," he said. Hawkish foreign minister of Estonia Kate Pentus-Rosimannus echoed him when she pompously declared in Turkey: "Our policy must be consecutive and strong, and we should continue our pressure on Russia". Jens Stoltenberg, the alliance Secretary General had to encourage in word such loud declarations of "the Baltic newcomers" but he did it by talking in generalities about strengthening of the alliance and reaction to modern challenges. There is actually a considerable number of NATO members who do not approve of a NATO permanent presence at its eastern borders. In reality, we can speak here just about the tiny NATO contingents in the former soviet Baltic states, and a rather symbolic assistance to Georgia and Ukraine. In Turkey Stoltenberg informed the ministers that the current NATO plans included so far only expansion of the Kiev office and direction of its military staff to Ukraine. He also spoke about holding a joint military exercise with NATO under the code name of "Southern Answer". No hints on admission of either Ukraine or Georgia to NATO were made in Turkey, and it is no wonder, because firstly (according to NATO’s internal order), countries with the unsolved territorial conflicts are not to be admitted to the alliance. Secondly, all the block members must have compatible military structures: first of all, communication, common calibers and types of shooting armament, a single combat manual, the English language common for everyone and a lot of other things. On practice, all the above-mentioned would require a complete rearmament and retraining of the army of a new NATO member which would cost dozens of billions. As for the Balts, they were treated by NATO in a very simple way: the size of their armies was reduced to several battalions armed with the neighbors’ "presents". For example, the army of Estonia received two transport planes from FRG, a ship – from Sweden, army shoes and fabric for the uniform – from Norway, and the USA gave it 1,200 automatic guns for free. Maybe, they are going to "continue to provide pressure on Russia" with the help of these pre-owned things? But the main point is that old members of NATO are hardly going to die for the provocative newcomers. Moreover, Jim Kerry, the USA Secretary of State recently explained (in a popular way) to Kiev which is striving for weaponry from the USA that they were allegedly ready to give it but Russia’s response would be targeted at the newcomers but not at America. By the way, this sententia could be well referred to the other east European Russophobes. Moreover, NATO’s European old-timers are hardly inclined to respond to the warring anti-Russian calls also because of the impudent attempts of Washington’s boundless domination in NATO. The Europeans were very much put on alert by a recent statement made by Douglas Liuit (the USA representative at the North Atlantic Alliance) that the USA is going to observe Article 5 of the NATO Charter about a collected action in the event of an armed aggression but not to wait for the consent of its colleagues – block members.
|
